Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

« Rebecca Blood interviews me || Back to Blog | Blogging an IA paper »

January 19, 2006

FYA*: Little bloopers of content, metadata and evolution

Headline in the Brookline Tab:

Vatican Denies Church's Appeal

No, the Pope has not stated that Catholicism is unappealing. Rather, a local church's appeal not to be closed was denied.


While I like being told metadata such as what's the maximum number of stars used in a rating system, I found this from the Boston Globe's Calendar section to be odd:

Restaurants reviewed by the Globe's regular critic, Alison Arnett, are rated on a scale of zero to four stars, four being the highest. [Emphasis added.]

Is there a single instance of a rating system using stars to indicate negatives? Just wondering...


And there's this, which was sent to my sister without attribution:

quarterhorse
Quarterhorse

*FYA= For Your Amusement.

Posted by D. Weinberger at January 19, 2006 01:12 PM


Comments

Hate to bring it up, but the star of David was once used negatively.

The pentagonal star might be used to rate unhealthily unchristian material?
1 star=not really Christian (Easter bunny)
2 stars=pagan (maypole dance)
3 stars=occult (halloween)
4 stars=very occult (ouija board)
5 stars=satanic (summon demon)

Posted by: Crosbie Fitch | January 19, 2006 01:51 PM


You probably already knew this, but just in case not: the intent of "four being the highest" is to distinguish it from a system where five is the highest. Probably it would be better if worded four being the highest possible" or something like that.

Posted by: David Coletta | January 19, 2006 02:30 PM


Oops. Reread your original post and I see you knew that already. Never mind, as the church lady says.

Posted by: David Coletta | January 19, 2006 02:31 PM


There is an extensive debate going on in the microformats list about whether star rating systems use zero stars or not, and how you might translate between zero-based and one-based star systems. It starts here.

Posted by: Kevin Marks | January 19, 2006 04:44 PM


There's a word (tag, if you like) for that horse flick, something like "the valley of discomfort".

Posted by: Branko Collin | January 22, 2006 10:52 PM


Lazy students you've got here; the correct phrase was of course "the uncanny valley" (select, right-click, Search in Google).

Perhaps there are no systems using stars denoting negatives, but perhaps there are systems using other icons denoting negatives, and stars may not necessarily mean "good" in one's culture.

The only way to find out is to test it, I guess.

Posted by: Branko Collin | January 23, 2006 04:57 AM


Post a comment

Guidelines for Commenting

Basically, you can say what you want. (Click here for the fine print.)

If you haven't left a comment here before, your comment may be put into a queue for me to approve. Sorry for the delay. Blame the damn spammers.